If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

An S-300 documentary

Whenever speaking about S-300, one should clarify whether it's an S-300P or S-300V family. Those are two entirely different SAM systems coming from then different design bureaus (but filling similar roles in many ways), bearing similar designation due to Soviet designation system (which was in many ways confusing not only for the westerners).

I do understand there are many variants of S300. Can anyone help to explan? What is the difference ebtween S400 & S500 then?

S-500 doesnt really exist yet, publicly. Nobody knows much about it, other than the stated goal that it is to be able to intercept objects in "near-space" altitudes. It is also not meant as a replacement for the S-400, but to complement it. I personally think it will fulfill a similar role to THAAD.

S-400 is the latest evolution of the S-300P family, highly mobile PVO air defense systems, engaging target from about 50km to 400km. S-300V is an army level AD system (mounted on tracked platforms so that it can go wherever tanks go) that was originally designed against tactical ballistic, and for this reason its missiles have a much higher acceleration rate than the S-300P missiles.

I do understand there are many variants of S300. Can anyone help to explan? What is the difference ebtween S400 & S500 then?

Point is that S-300P and S-300V are not two versions of the same system, they are two different systems entirely, designed by two rivaling bureaus (Almaz and Antey) at that time (in the 70ties). They share similar designation due to the fact that they've both been designed to meet similar specification - however Soviets adopted one for PVO (S-300P) and the other one for Army (S-300V). Each of them use unique missiles, FCS, radars etc., which are not compatible in any way.

Similar designation and similar specifications cause widespread confusion between these two systems up to today, now even more so due to Almaz and Antey, once in fierce competition, merging into the same corporation.

While Russians themselves are using confusing designations, NATO designates them differently: SA-10 and SA-12.

Whenever speaking about S-300, one should clarify whether it's an S-300P or S-300V family. Those are two entirely different SAM systems coming from then different design bureaus (but filling similar roles in many ways), bearing similar designation due to Soviet designation system (which was in many ways confusing not only for the westerners).

Yeah, watching the documentary, assuming the translation was correct, it looks like they're about as on the ball as The History Channel. That is to say, not much.

Point is that S-300P and S-300V are not two versions of the same system, they are two different systems entirely, designed by two rivaling bureaus (Almaz and Antey) at that time (in the 70ties). They share similar designation due to the fact that they've both been designed to meet similar specification - however Soviets adopted one for PVO (S-300P) and the other one for Army (S-300V). Each of them use unique missiles, FCS, radars etc., which are not compatible in any way.

Similar designation and similar specifications cause widespread confusion between these two systems up to today, now even more so due to Almaz and Antey, once in fierce competition, merging into the same corporation.

While Russians themselves are using confusing designations, NATO designates them differently: SA-10 and SA-12.